Weapons and money
Posted: 7 October 2004 at 12:58:01
As I was watching and listening to the vice presidential debate this week, I thought about something that I don’t feel the media, talk radio, or the bloggers have discussed. I don’t know if my thought is original... it’s probably just a reiteration of something others have said in a different way.
The liberals and anti-Bush people have been using the reports that no weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq as proof of their claims that the Bush administration misled the American public. The Bush defense has been, “Well, we know we haven’t found any WMD, but it was still a good thing to go into Iraq because Saddam Hussein was a bad person.”
Anyway, my epiphany was this: After 9/11, the immediate priority of the government was securing the country against another 9/11. A lot of speculation was done about what methods and tools the next terrorist attack would employ. It didn’t help we had the anthrax scare along the east coast soon after 9/11.
I can imagine a number of security analysts, intelligence workers, and government representatives meeting several times to talk about the possibilities of future terror. I can imagine someone in these meetings saying, “Al Qaida really needs only two things to execute another attack on our country: materials and money.
Materials and money. Intelligence indicated Iraq had both and had the will to give both to terrorists willing to damage America or American interests. After using this intelligence to warrant invading Iraq, the oil for food scandal uncovered billions of dollars Hussein was stockpiling for future military (i.e. terror) purposes. No WMD, but plenty of plans and funds to make it happen.
I don’t care how you look at it, Iraq was a threat and neutralizing that threat was a good thing. We are doing great things in that country and should continue to foster development of a stable democracy there.